WTF Wisconsin? (Formerly Walker convo thread)

[Chibibar]

I think the states Republicans didn't understand what this particular set of tea party candidates stood for. They saw the (R) and voted how they usually do. Since Governor Doyle (D) was such an epic failure, it's no surprise the people of the state weren't willing to give Mayor Barrett a chance.

Well Governor Walker is making a whole new of epic failure (IMO - When you have tens of thousands of people protesting at the capital, the polls show they don't want it, and Walker still pass it anyways, that can't be good for future (R) people)

 

[Krisken]

Sorry, it was the comparing of the two actions as equal that bothered me. I guess I don't really see it as such.

The first court date has been set for Friday over Dane County suing the state over the passage of the collective bargaining law. Defendants include Secretary of State Doug La Follette, Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald and Senate President Mike Ellis, and Assembly Speaker Jeff Fitzgerald and Assembly Majority Leader Scott Suder.

 

[Necronic]

The point about the Dems fleeing more to draw attention is a good one, and it raises an interesting comparison.

The democrats used a procedural rule to lock down congress and prevent representative democracy from working as intended. This was done primarily to raise national attention.

The republicans used a series of procedural rules to re-open congress and pass a series of bills that would have been passed if the representative democracy was working as intended, but also circumvented representative democracy by keeping the democrats from voting. This was done to pass bills that would have been passed anyways.

Now, I'm not defending the republicans here. While I don't disagree with some of their procedural moves I find others highly distasteful and probably illegal (the current thing about blocking voting.) However, I do think that both sides chose to use procedural loopholes to break the intent of representative democracy, and of the twoI think that the initial actions of the republicans were more ethical as the goal was to restore the power of the elected officials that had been empowered by the people of the state to make decisions, whereas the democrats goal was to say 'not fair' on the national stage as loud as they could.

Which of those is right? I don't know.
-------------

As for the protests, I dunno how much that really matters. Madison is not Wisconsin in the exact same way that Austin is not Texas. When I lived in Austin you would see massive protests all the time at the capital about this thing or that, but the people protesting were not even close to an accurate representation of the population of the state.

Should democracy bow to the principle of "every man has a vote, weighted by the volume of his voice"? No. The power of the individual in a democracy is in his vote, not his voice. If the people of Wisconsin voted in a bunch of tea party republicans they should not be surprised when they attack unions.

As for the polls, I hold a somewhat similar view. A poll I would *love* to see would be how many people in the crowd voted in the state legislative elections. I'm curious how many of the polls even ask people about that. I could care less about the opinion of someone who didn't vote. Its like telling the waiter "just bring me whatever" and then complaining about what he brings to the table.

 

[sixpackshaker]

Quorum rules are in place to insure that the minority does not get over run by "democracy." It allows those with out the votes to steer unpopular/illegal/immoral laws.

 

[Necronic]

Right, but that's not the same as using them to stall a vote. That's a procedural loophole.

 

[Chibibar]

Right, but that's not the same as using them to stall a vote. That's a procedural loophole.

True, but the Dems can say "We did everything we could even walk out on a vote so they won't have a quorum" CYA maneuver?

 

[Krisken]

Watch as someone claims to be a police officer, but never shows proof of being officers. Then they admit to being private security they are identified as State Patrol.

 

[AshburnerX]

... is there any difference between being local police and State Patrol?

 

[Krisken]

You mean other than jurisdictions and general services provided?

 

[AshburnerX]

You mean other than jurisdictions and general services provided?

I didn't say it wasn't irregular, because it is, only asked if there was a reason why they couldn't fulfill that role. I agree that it shows they are at their wits end and that they have few supporters, but it's not like they hired Xe mercenaries to keep people out.

 

[Krisken]

Using state patrol as your own private security detail? Having that same state patrol violate a court order and keep people out of the capitol building when the city and county police refuse to do so? I have a hard time justifying that. Plus, when they each won't identify themselves, despite saying they are police officers, that is INSANE.

 

[Espy]

Plus, when they each won't identify themselves, despite saying they are police officers, that is INSANE.

Yeah, thats really stupid, no matter how annoying the protesters might be to you they deserve decent treatment.

 

[AshburnerX]

Using state patrol as your own private security detail? Having that same state patrol violate a court order and keep people out of the capitol building when the city and county police refuse to do so? I have a hard time justifying that. Plus, when they each won't identify themselves, despite saying they are police officers, that is INSANE.

See, those are valid points. I wasn't sure of the point you were originally trying to make.

 

[jwhouk]

First of all: The reason why Barrett didn't win last year was because the election was one year too early. He would have gotten a TON of sympathy votes if the election had been in '09 - after he'd gotten the crap kicked out of him by that insane guy at the Wisconsin State Fair.

Second: State Patrolmen have two major differences over police officers. One, they are state employees that have to go through the civil service application process to get their jobs; two, their jurisdiction is the entire state of Wisconsin. Technically, they do follow the orders of the Governor, but I'm not 100% sure they're his "security detail". Oh, and if memory serves, their union contracts weren't affected by the Budget Repair Bill. (Insert snarky remark by disaffected state employee here.)

Lastly: I'm pretty sure I aced my interview up at Winnebago, but that commute is gonna be hella annoying for me if I get it. And I'm already dreading having to meet the physical fitness requirements (17 push-ups, 23 sit-ups, and 17:30 in a mile-and-a-half run).

 

[AshburnerX]

And I'm already dreading having to meet the physical fitness requirements (17 push-ups, 23 sit-ups, and 17:30 in a mile-and-a-half run).

Those aren't exactly terrible difficult requirements, as long as you have good technique. Just do a little practice at home and you'll meet them fine.

 

[Krisken]

First of all: The reason why Barrett didn't win last year was because the election was one year too early. He would have gotten a TON of sympathy votes if the election had been in '09 - after he'd gotten the crap kicked out of him by that insane guy at the Wisconsin State Fair.

To be fair, he was attacked with a pipe. Pretty bad ass for a mayor.

Second: State Patrolmen have two major differences over police officers. One, they are state employees that have to go through the civil service application process to get their jobs; two, their jurisdiction is the entire state of Wisconsin. Technically, they do follow the orders of the Governor, but I'm not 100% sure they're his "security detail". Oh, and if memory serves, their union contracts weren't affected by the Budget Repair Bill. (Insert snarky remark by disaffected state employee here.)

Well, it does help that when Walker took office he named Stephen Fitzgerald as head of the State Patrol. Yes, Fitzgerald’s two sons are Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald and Assembly Speaker Jeff Fitzgerald. Any surprise there?

Lastly: I'm pretty sure I aced my interview up at Winnebago, but that commute is gonna be hella annoying for me if I get it. And I'm already dreading having to meet the physical fitness requirements (17 push-ups, 23 sit-ups, and 17:30 in a mile-and-a-half run).

Congratulations and good luck! I'm sure you'll be able to make the physical fitness requirements. Glad to hear you found something so quick.

 

[AshburnerX]

Yeah, those fitness requirements don't sound all that bad. Doing push-ups and sit-ups is more about technique than endurance and a mile and a half in 17:00 is actually really lenient.

 

[SpecialKO]

Yeah, those fitness requirements don't sound all that bad. Doing push-ups and sit-ups is more about technique than endurance and a mile and a half in 17:00 is actually really lenient.

Yeah, that's barely jogging pace. I don't know your current level of fitness, but if you can stay hydrated and keep up a nice steady pace (no need to put on huge bursts of speed), you should be able to nail it just fine.

Sit-ups and push-ups are totally about technique, and just require practice. There's a reason why crazy fitness people do hundreds a day as a matter of course.

EDIT: Also, you probably know, but it really can't be said enough: take the time to stretch your muscles, particularly your calves and thighs, before and after jogging/running. Since the distance is relatively short for the time, the state of readiness of your muscles is probably the biggest factor.

Also, see if you can practice the run portion on the actual route/track. Course familiarity always helps keep focus.

 

[Necronic]

I can't speak for wisconsin, but in Austin/TX the State Troopers have jurisdiction in the capitol buildings

 

[Krisken]

They may have jurisdiction, but they don't act as the personal bodyguard of the Governor.

As it stands now, the Capitol Police are responsible for security at the capitol building in Wisconsin.

 

[SpecialKO]

I can't speak for wisconsin, but in Austin/TX the State Troopers have jurisdiction in the capitol buildings

Don't they also have to show a badge if asked when they self-identify as police officers?

 

[sixpackshaker]

A State Trooper is with Governor Perry at all times, it is true of most Governors. They also act as drivers for the Gov's too. Like the one that nearly killed the Gov of New Jersey because he was texting and driving.

 

[Krisken]

That is what I found most disturbing, SpecialKO. The officers said they were officers, but wouldn't give a name or badge number. I'm pretty sure this is a big no-no.

 

[Necronic]

Don't they also have to show a badge if asked when they self-identify as police officers?

Probably, I don't know. To be honest (should have said this) I can't watch the video as I am at work.

 

[sixpackshaker]

I've not watched the video. Really the only times they need to show the badge is when they are making an arrest, or pulling their gun...

 

[SpecialKO]

What about when they're trying to kick you out of a public building and threatening you with obstruction of justice charges?

 

[Krisken]

We should ask Officer_Charon, eh?

 

[Espy]

Yeah, I wonder how that works. Any searches for it just pull up the old "if you ask a cop if they are a cop they have to tell you" myth. I would assume they have to show you their badge or give you their badge number if you ask for it but I suppose that might be only under certain circumstances.

 

[Krisken]

I sent a PM to Charon. I'm sure he'll be kind enough to set us straight either way when he comes by.

 

[sixpackshaker]

Would each of the officers escorting you off the property, have to show their badges?

 

[SpecialKO]

I'm fairly sure that self-identifying as a police officer to get you to do something might be one of those circumstances.

 

[Krisken]

Or even THEIR NAME.

 

[Espy]

I'm fairly sure that self-identifying as a police officer to get you to do something might be one of those circumstances.

I think it's reasonable to assume so.
The only thing that makes me doubt it is that if there was a law on the books in Wisconsin (and remember Krisken, things might vary from State to State so Charon might not know) these folks who took the video would probably be trumpeting it and it doesn't appear they are unless I missed it.

 

[SpecialKO]

I think it's reasonable to assume so.
The only thing that makes me doubt it is that if there was a law on the books in Wisconsin (and remember Krisken, things might vary from State to State so Charon might not know) these folks who took the video would probably be trumpeting it and it doesn't appear they are unless I missed it.

It might also be because after that first guy, the other members of the security team acted very reasonably, not hassling the camera-people, just keeping the entryway clear.

 

[Krisken]

Representative Mark Pocan's letter to the Fitzgeralds.